Men with boobs.

[Random]

Originally Posted by BullDog

I'm not sure how many times it has to be repeated that the issue isn't one individual's personal identity.

Edit: as far as I know no one here knows Cynthia Nixon's partner personally.

I guess that is the difference in viewpoints..

Your stance on the issue is that it isn't one individual's personal identity...

My stance is that it is always one person

For me.. the indivdual is more important that the mass.. one is just as important as the many...

[BullDog]

Originally Posted by Random

I guess that is the difference in viewpoints..

Your stance on the issue is that it isn't one individual's personal identity...

My stance is that it is always one person

For me.. the indivdual is more important that the mass.. one is just as important as the many...

*banging my head against the brick wall yet again*

"she's basically a man with boobs"

that a generalized statement- not my partner identifies as a short man with boobs.

This has nothing to do with one person's personal identity- none of us even knows what hers is or if she even has one.

Geeze Louise

Everybody can call themselves what they want and their partners can too if with consent. So what does that have to do with the issue Heart has raised?

[apretty]

Originally Posted by Heart

We live in a world where what it means to be a woman is so restricted and devalued and female masculinity is so under-represented, that a woman as sophisticated as Cynthia Nixon publicly calls her butch lover "a short man with boobs." Ugh.

thanks, nixon's comment totally felt dismissive and shitty, to me.

(and if i'd have said that about anyone i've dated, i'd have found myself very SINGLE, after.)

[Bob]

Originally Posted by BullDog

. So what does that have to do with the issue Heart has raised?

I'LL tell you what it's got to do with it.

The price of Limburger in Hamburg.

[Heart]

Originally Posted by Medusa

I think Im getting stuck on the intimacy.

I asked myself how I would feel if the person making this comment was a random stranger on the street.

I'd be pissed.

The fact that it is her partner making this comment makes me feel as if there is intimate knowledge and intimate boundaries between them that I dont have a right to impose upon.
Where is the line? Is there an intersection between fighting for the visibility of masculine women by calling out comments such as these and taking comments such as these as intimate words to and about people who are partnered no matter their gender?

..

Dusa - it's not about the individual identity for me or about the intimate relationship. I'm not concerned with their identities or their relationship. For me, it's about the paucity of language and images, the assumption that only men/male can be masculine, and all that that implies about views of women's genders and sexualities in society, culture and communities, including queer ones. Even if Nixon's partner is not a woman, the statment is minimizing and dismissive of the reality and complexity of butch women's lives -- because her partner is certainly seen in the world as a woman. Except now she is seen as a man with boobs.

I don't hold Nixon responsible for the fact that there are such narrow visions of what women are, and so few ways to describe the lives of women that fall outside of cultural norms, but it saddens me that she has to use this kind of tired, (and yes, sexist, misogynistic, and homophobic) remark to describe her partner.

Heart

[Jett]

Originally Posted by Dylan

So, she's not allowed to be referred to by her partner (someone who obviously knows her as they live together, and they're raising children together) as a 'man with boobs', but she IS allowed to be referred to by complete strangers on the internet as 'a butch' (which she may not ID with at all, and being that her partner has pretty much stated they don't ID as a butch/femme couple, we can infer that she doesn't ID as a butch)

And all because complete strangers on the internet feel they have a right to tag her as THEY deem fit, and in a way in which makes THEM comfortable.

And this is justified with 'personal IDs are out of fashion this year'?


Oh, Ok,
Dylan

Is this (below) what you're referring to as saying her partner saying she doesn't ID as butch? (I say she b/c her partner refers to her as "her")

Because I pretty much read that as her saying she'd (Christine) be upset for saying that really the personalities are the opposite of what they appear as... and also I know she did say one of the things she loved about her was her "butch-ness", earlier in the article.

Probably shouldn't be making statements that she isn't butch any more than assuming that she is (or identifies as such).

"Christine would probably kill me for saying this, but my daughter said one time that if you really had to break this down, [it looks like] she would be butch and I would be femme...but really once you get to know us it's really the opposite."

[Jett]

It's interesting, would it be as acceptable and defended if Cynthia had said "one of the things I love about him is his trans-ness" - "he's a short woman without boobs".

If you find that offensive, but are defending her about the "short man with boobs" crappola... well that to me is a problem.

Because I know... everyone would be all over that like fly's on shit.

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Heart

Gemme - but do you see my point? Why does her masculinity make her a man? Why not a masculine woman? Why do we persist in assuming that masculinity belongs to men? This is how male gets privileged over female constantly in queer communities.

Heart

It doesn't, necessarily, but maybe it does. We've apparently beat the poor horse several times since I logged in earlier about this, so I won't go into why our perception of her relationship makes no difference and that she, as one entertainer in this world who happens to be a member of our community, is not responsible for teaching the masses about gender identity, male privilege or anything beyond or in between.

Originally Posted by EzeeTiger

As we all know how someone id's varies greatly. Maybe her partner wants that as her id, who knows? Maybe Nixon was just trying to be funny. The thing is just because someone is in the public eye it doesn't make them the spokesperson for all queers, but yet at the same time it does draw a lot of attention to us. For good or bad.

Originally Posted by Linus

I think the more important question is: does it bother her butch? For all we know, this is a term of endearment between them.

Agreed. To both.

Originally Posted by Heart

Actually Linus, I don't think that's the most important question. I don't think each and every personal story and id necessarily takes precidence over cultural expressions of sexism, misogyny, and homophobia towards butch women. And that's how this reads to me. If nothing else, Nixon's language was careless and dismissive towards masculine women, whether her partner identifies as male or female, (and as far as I know, she ids as female), is irrelevant.

I agree that the wording is awkward at best. Luckily, no one else has ever misspoken or had their words twisted or misquoted by folks not in the slightest bit involved in the discussion at hand.

To me, she was extolling a particular virtue or group of virtues or traits of her partner. I, personally, connected the term she used to mean "my partner has a masculinity (very similar to that of a man) and a femininity (physically) that I enjoy". Does that mean that masculinity always equals man? No. But for many, it does.

Originally Posted by Heart

I find it interesting that in this instance, many are so willing to shrug and say, "well, who knows? Maybe that's how she identifies, that's all that matters, etc." Why is that all that matters? That is NOT something we would say if the comment was in reference to someone's ethnicity or ability, for example. You wouldn't refer to someone as a "crip," or "white trash" even if they refer to themselves that way. The exact point I am making here is that we tolerate comments like this about women, shrug them off, make it a personal thing, instead of having a community standard that says it's not okay to refer to butches as "men with boobs."

But what if Christine likes being addressed as such? What if she's okay with her partner saying that about HER? Who are we to judge?

Originally Posted by BullDog

LOL, I've never heard of a butch describing themselves as a short man with boobs. Is this a new gender identity?

It could be. Or not.

Originally Posted by BullDog

When someone makes a public comment that many would construe as transphobic- that's what it's called- transphobic. People don't bend their ass over backwards trying to find something clever or cute about it.

What is said or shared between a couple in private is between them.

Private..until hundreds or thousands find out about it and then deconstruct it and assign the blame of hundreds of years of phobias and lynchings to it.

I'm sure Cynthia wishes she said something different or added to the comment. Well, I would think she would, but I don't really know, because I'm not her and my perception of her words and relationship don't really mean anything to anyone but myself.

Originally Posted by Medusa

I think Im getting stuck on the intimacy.

I asked myself how I would feel if the person making this comment was a random stranger on the street.

I'd be pissed.

The fact that it is her partner making this comment makes me feel as if there is intimate knowledge and intimate boundaries between them that I dont have a right to impose upon.
Where is the line? Is there an intersection between fighting for the visibility of masculine women by calling out comments such as these and taking comments such as these as intimate words to and about people who are partnered no matter their gender?

..

I'd probably be confused. I might even ask for clarity (and yes, I do do that with strangers some times).

We can't pick and choose how our community is presented. Honestly, I think that is why some of those who have posted are truly pissed. It may be tied up with male privilege and genuine offense at the term, but who are we to impose (thanks for that...it's exactly what I feel) on their relationship. Did she come to our home and say it? Nope.

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Metropolis

It's interesting, would it be as acceptable and defended if Cynthia had said "one of the things I love about him is his trans-ness" - "he's a short woman without boobs".

If you find that offensive, but are defending her about the "short man with boobs" crappola... well that to me is a problem.

Because I know... everyone would be all over that like fly's on shit.

Unlike everyone is all over what she actually said?

[Jett]

Originally Posted by Gemme

Unlike everyone is all over what she actually said?

Everyone's not actually...

ETA: Not that everyone should be... I was making a comparison in the severity of reaction to the hypothetical situation I put forth and the situation at hand.

I stand by what I said, the reactions to the situation of a woman (to which Cynthia refers to her partner as) being called a man, as opposed to a male being referred to as a woman, in the context of these discussions in our community aren't comparable.

Metro

[SassyLeo]

When I read the front page of the article... my initial thought is... WOW she could use some education!

She specifically said that she was not attracted to or dated women until she met her partner. How long have they been together (did it say...I cannot remember)? Now because she has been with her partner for X number of years, she is supposed to be an expert on all things butch & femme; in terms of what kind of "language" to use?

My point is this...while I totally agree that her comments are archaic in regards to the language of "gender spectrum" and playing into the male/female roles that society has forced upon every relationship dynamic, I am not convinced she is "sophisticated" and/or even has the level of information/awareness that we all do.

Years ago when I first came to this community, I had little knowledge about butch/femme dynamics, gender politics, etc (aside from my own growing up with gay parents in the 80's/90's which was still early for alot of this...). I learned by reading and dialoguing with ALL OF YOU!

That doesn't mean I think it is ok; in terms of how she used the gender role language. I guess I choose to look at it like, hey...we still have alot of work to do; to educate...and especially those who are fore front to the media.

It makes me want to write her a letter

[BullDog]

Sassy, yeah she appears to be newly out. I don't hate the messenger just the message. And also the fact that such tired, sexist, misogynist and homophobic remarks are being defended.

To quote Heart:

Originally Posted by Heart

I don't hold Nixon responsible for the fact that there are such narrow visions of what women are, and so few ways to describe the lives of women that fall outside of cultural norms, but it saddens me that she has to use this kind of tired, (and yes, sexist, misogynistic, and homophobic) remark to describe her partner.

Heart

The message over and over is masculine women/butch women- suck it up, laugh it off. Not so when derogatory comments are made towards other masculine gender identities in our community.

[Soon]

Originally Posted by Heart

women exist along a diverse spectrum of gender and sexual identities, all the way from ultra-feminine to ultra-masculine. Being ultra-masculine does NOT make one a man anymore than being ultra-feminine makes one straight.

That, in a nutshell, is my point.

Heart

Thank you, Heart, for so succinctly phrasing what is wrong with Nixon's description.

Last night, I was IM'ing, linked the article, pasted the phrase in question and typed *UGH*...today, I thought about it more and, lo and behold, a mighty thread to read with much to ponder.

Many of you have already expressed (better than I could have articulated!) the reason for my automatic response of taking offense at her phrasing and equating her partner with a man.

Nixon has been with her partner since 2004--not that she needs to be the expert on anything--but god, please! People were already (I know b/c I follow the celeb goss) commenting upon Marinoni's masculine looks/presentation and same 'ol comments of *why not just be with a man?* Now, Nixon verifies (to the public) that a butch or masculine presenting woman basically IS a man...with boobs. She confirmed (joking or not, private understanding or not) what people already thought of butch women--they really are just women posing as men--so why not just be with a (real) man? (especially when you are with a FAKE man, an ugly looking mannish woman at that! <--variations of awful, disgusting comments that have been posted pre and post this article regarding this couple.

As far as whether Marinoni ID's as other than female/woman, here is a snippet of an interview with Nixon from the past who clearly states that she fell in love with a woman:

She continues, “I had been with men all my life and I had never met a woman I had fallen in love with before. But when I did, it didn’t seem so strange. “I don’t define myself. I’m just a woman in love with another woman.”
....
She notes, “I met this woman and I fell in love with her. In terms of my sexual orientation, I don’t really feel that I changed. I don’t feel any different than I did before.”

Anyway, regardless of where you fall on this issue, what a great discussion.

[BullDog]

I think her 3 year old son is right on the mark:



Charlie’s processing of the relationship started at school. “His teachers were just so great about it,” Nixon says, “because they were the first people that started referring to ‘Charlie’s moms,’ which is so lovely, and we really hadn’t done that yet. So Charlie came home one day and he said [to Marinoni], ‘You’re my mommy too!’ ” Deciding to seize the opportunity, Nixon began calling her partner Mama Christine. “I said, ‘Charlie, where’s Mama Christine? Is Mama Christine in the other room? Would you take this to Mama Christine? What does Mama Christine want for breakfast?’ I did this a nauseating amount, and one morning we’re at breakfast and Christine is in the shower and Charlie says, ‘Where’s Papa?’ My daughter says ‘Papa? You mean Daddy?’ And he said ‘No, Papa! Christine!’ He’d come up with this masculine name for her. It’s gone through a whole series of things.” When Charlie’s Russian barber told him to ask his daddy to give him a little brother, Nixon says she stood back to watch the preschool-age Charlie’s *reaction. “I was just going to let it go—what are you going to say? But I saw Charlie—I saw it land and how he thought about this, and he was quiet for a while. Then he very slowly said, ‘Sometimes I call Christine Mommy.’ It was like Charlie was trying to navigate what everybody’s assumptions about him and his family were at age 3. It was so amazing.”

http://advocate.com/printArticle.aspx?id=110591

She's Papa and she's Mama Christine and she's Mommy

[BullDog]

The story that Nixon describes of her family is very similar to one I am familiar with. My butch roommate is a mother and grandmother. Her grandson, when he was about 3, started calling his grandmother Guz (we think it's a combo between Buzz Lightyear and Grandma). It fits his butch grandmother to a t. The kids call their femme grandmother Nana. Kids know butches are somewhat different and they figure it out.

Whether Nixon's partner specifically ids as butch or not, she appears to face many of the same issues that a lot of butches/masculine women face. She deals with people that know and love her as well as perfect strangers who might not always know where to place her. She deals with it in her house, at the barber shop, at her kids' school, wherever she happens to go. That's in the context of being a masculine, lesbian/queer WOMAN (in terms of how you are perceived, not talking personal, individual identity) in this world- and all the good, bad and indifferent things that go along with that. The very lived experiences that lots of people in butch femme communities seem to want to ignore or erase.

[Kobi]

This thread made me chuckle.

After being out for 30+ years, it is the same never ending, always growing and changing identity, labels, individuality, all inclusive nonsense. We, as a community cannot agree on any of the terms and inclusions but we expect outsiders to accept and understand the free for all we call a community?

And, we cant agree on this but feel we have the right to judge and comment on how someone else sees their own relationship? Do you really care what words Cynthia Nixon uses to describe her partner? Is like the world going to stop revolving if they have their own way of being that doesnt coincide the the multitude of opinions just within this thread? Isnt that their right?

When you stop and think about it....maybe the slow growth of acceptance is being fueled by our own need to constantly reinvent the wheel everytime we hear of a new word or term or identity or whatever. Heck, Cynthia Nixon is my opinion is just a heterosexual lesbian.....but thats a whole 'nother topic.....lol.

If we cant agree on it and accept it, why should anyone else accept it?

[Cyclopea]

If she's a man with boobs she must be able to stroll around central park shirtless enjoying the sun on her double D's without getting so much as a second glance.

I took Nixon's remarks as being humorous and off-the-cuff and overall I respect her immensely and don't hold her comment against her.

That being said I appreciate Heart's topic: that there is a lack of language to describe female masculinity without equating it with maleness and thus insulting the naturalness of the butch woman. Being masculine does not make someone less of a woman.

Great thread!

[Arwen]

I just have one question.

Who the heck is Cynthia Nixon and why are her words so important?

I get that some of us see her words as misogynistic.
I get that some of us don't.

I really am quite clueless as to who she is so I'll have to google her first.

My worry is that we are putting our wants and needs for an inclusive society who sees things the way we do in the mouth of one ten-minute-celebrity.

[Cyclopea]

Originally Posted by Arwen

I just have one question.

Who the heck is Cynthia Nixon and why are her words so important?

I get that some of us see her words as misogynistic.
I get that some of us don't.

I really am quite clueless as to who she is so I'll have to google her first.

My worry is that we are putting our wants and needs for an inclusive society who sees things the way we do in the mouth of one ten-minute-celebrity.

I don't think it matters who Nixon is or what she said- I think Heart just used that as a good example to start a discussion on the language surrounding female masculinity...

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Arwen

I just have one question.

Who the heck is Cynthia Nixon and why are her words so important?

I get that some of us see her words as misogynistic.
I get that some of us don't.

I really am quite clueless as to who she is so I'll have to google her first.

My worry is that we are putting our wants and needs for an inclusive society who sees things the way we do in the mouth of one ten-minute-celebrity.

Cynthia Nixon is the redheaded actress on Sex in The City. Her words are as important as Anne Heche's were.

If it helps, I think remaining clueless on this is a good thing.